I was having a discussion about disruptive technology in medical education (as you do) and in a reply one particular line stood out for me…
I think the world is now mature enough to be sceptical about what we see and hear on the internet.
Sure, that is true for those of us who happily embrace the internet and internet 2.0 but there are still many who are not happy that we are out there, sharing our thoughts and having free open discussions with a global audience. We can’t be trusted, you see, to think for ourselves.
I still feel like the world is split into us and them – those who want to share and collaborate openly and freely and those who see value only in what they have to pay for and what they are told to read. As a commercial photographer, I spoke at numerous business group meetings and events about the beauty of collaboration and sharing using social media – only to split rooms in two. It is the same in the world of medicine.
I’m baffled that we still need articles like that in the BMJ this week bemoaning the tweet-dodgers at conferences, complaining that their data will be stolen or misinterpreted if anyone tweets from such private gatherings. It goes on to the suggest guidelines for conference tweeting…yawn…still needed in 2016? Clearly so. I have a colleague studying for a Masters in Medical Education to whom I recently had to explain the term FOAMed. His response was an eye-roll and a “whatever”. I think he and others are massively underestimating the power that online sharing and teaching will have in the future (and even now). Imagine a world where we no longer have to make sacrificial offerings to the gods of publications, to the gatekeepers of the journals who decide whether or not our careers are worthy of their ink. Judging academics by where they are published is just a ludicrous idea isn’t it? Yet my portfolio and my job applications would have it otherwise.
Until we can break free from the current outdated system, there will always be us and them. For many, what is seen as cheap will be seen as worthless. Anything that is hidden behind paywalls must therefore be far better? I disagree. Data/information/anything that we create – it can all be copied and shared on a massive scale on the internet – but that doesn’t make it worthless.
What we need to move towards appreciating is that the value comes not from what can be easily copied but from what comes with it, those things that can’t be easily copied or stolen – what is instant or timely; what is personal; analysis based on the experience and the validity and the accessibility of the authors. I’m talking about our ideas, our conviction, our experience and excellence – essentially, ourselves and what we bring with our data.
“I don’t have enough followers to bother” is a false predicament – you only need one or two followers who share your interest, who see something in your work and who will engage – this is all you need to get your work and ideas out there because there will be people who care enough about your vision to join in and to share. Maybe if there is one person reading my blog today who feels strongly enough they will share and discuss – that may be all I need. There is a phrase I have stolen (from someone who shared it with me) and I believe it strongly: a rising tide floats all boats. Information should be free to be shared in order to raise the collective up together and further. If you are on your way up, take others with you.
Open access for freely available research, data and even opinion undermines the established order – but we don’t want to do it to piss people off (maybe) we do it because we don’t need the established order anymore. It wasn’t working for us. It only ever worked for itself.
For research and education in the world of medicine, it is such an exciting time and it is time to accept that there is another way.
Part 2: Creative Commons : the best medicine? (watch this space)